Pablo Negrete Rosila; Ma Magdalena Garcia Alvarez v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NHY/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PABLO NEGRETE ROSILA; MA
MAGDALENA GARCIA ALVAREZ,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74685
Agency Nos. A095-307-523
A095-307-522
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Pablo Negrete Rosila and Ma Magdalena Garcia Alvarez, spouses and
natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen. We have
FILED
FEB 25 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

NHY/Research 07-74685 2
jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion the
denial of a motion to reopen, Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir. 2008),
we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Petitioners’ motion to
reopen where the new evidence they presented did not support prima facie
eligiblity for cancellation of removal. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592,
600 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --